Re: [PR] Box field to reduce DatafusionError size [datafusion]

2025-05-09 Thread via GitHub
ctsk commented on PR #15990: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15990#issuecomment-2867666348 That seems reasonable. Closing. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the speci

Re: [PR] Box field to reduce DatafusionError size [datafusion]

2025-05-09 Thread via GitHub
ctsk closed pull request #15990: Box field to reduce DatafusionError size URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15990 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. T

Re: [PR] Box field to reduce DatafusionError size [datafusion]

2025-05-09 Thread via GitHub
ctsk commented on PR #15990: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15990#issuecomment-2867591550 No, there's no particular issue motivating this change. I just think it's good practice to not have enum variants differ in size so much. In addition, `SchemaError::FieldNotFound` alrea

Re: [PR] Box field to reduce DatafusionError size [datafusion]

2025-05-09 Thread via GitHub
comphead commented on PR #15990: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15990#issuecomment-2867598303 api change are pretty expensive from the user migration point of view, I'd vote to keep this as is until we get an issue justifying the change -- This is an automated message from

Re: [PR] Box field to reduce DatafusionError size [datafusion]

2025-05-09 Thread via GitHub
comphead commented on PR #15990: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15990#issuecomment-2866897984 112 bytes is still okay to be on stack? is there any issue causing this change? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please lo